One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on January 25, 2023, 06:06:48 PM
-
List analysis: Is this the last year of Tigers’ golden era?
Geelong has the oldest list in the AFL again in 2023, but other clubs at the top and bottom of the age and experience spectrum might surprise you. See where your club ranks.
Average Age
Geelong 25.5 years
Western Bulldogs 25.4 years
Brisbane 25.1 years
Richmond 25.1 years
Melbourne 25.1 years
Collingwood 25.0 years
Gold Coast 24.8 years
Carlton 24.7 years
West Coast 24.5 years
St Kilda 24.4 years
Port Adelaide 24.4 years
GWS Giants 24.2 years
North Melbourne 24.1 years
Sydney 24.1 years
Fremantle 24.0 years
Essendon 23.9 years
Adelaide 23.8 years
Hawthorn 23.1 years
Over 30s on each list: (As of start of 2023 season)
12 Geelong
9 West Coast
8 Richmond, Western Bulldogs
6 Collingwood, GWS, Melbourne
5 Brisbane, North Melbourne, Port Adelaide, Sydney.
4 Adelaide, Fremantle, Gold Coast
3 Essendon
2 Carlton
1 Hawthorn, St Kilda
Average games played
Geelong 92.4 games
Melbourne 84.9 games
Richmond 83.0 games
Brisbane 79.6 games
Western Bulldogs 75.8 games
Collingwood 75.1 games
West Coast 73.4 games
Sydney 69.5 games
Port Adelaide 67.9 games
Carlton 65.0 games
North Melbourne 64.4 games
St Kilda 64.1 games
Gold Coast 63.5 games
GWS Giants 58.5 games
Essendon 56.2 games
Fremantle 55.3 games
Adelaide 51.7 games
Hawthorn 43.8 games
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-2023-cats-still-the-eldest-team-of-all-headed-into-2023-season/news-story/7907814ddbe30c2dcc06400b2eccdfcf
-
If they win another flag I would tolerate a decade of mediocrity but that's about the limit you'd think
-
Staying a contender is the aim from here.
-
Stats stats and damn lies when not done in context.
I wish they would stop being lazy and put up the age of the best 22"s of each team and say the number of say 21, 22 and unders at each club.
Could have this wrong i did it real quick but last year and of course it has changed but Hathorn had 18 aged 22 or under the premiers 14 and we were in the middle with 16. Sydney had 15 with another 5 aged 23. adelaide had 21 players aged 22 or under
Another look is Carlton had just 12 aged 22 and under but had another 18 aged 23 - 25. still all young and shows they have been developing their kids for awhile while the likes of say Hawthorn are basically starting out.
I reckon if you do the maths every club has a good share of young players but every club varys in how many games they have managed to put into them.
Most clubs best 22 is invariably older than the overall age of their lists because the developed players tend to get games in front of undeveloped kids.
The tipping point seems to be when your team not your list hits an average age of 27.
While premierships have been won with an average age of 27 it has been done just 5 times i believe since the draft began.
P/A in 2004, Geelong 2011, Hawthorn 2015, Richmond 2020, Geelong 2022.
Interesting thing is none of them had success for periods after winning a flag having hitting that age with their best 22.
P/A t has been 19 yrs since their flag and they went into heavy decline. Geelong have managed to stay in finals but it took 11 years to win another flag. Hawthorn continue to be in rebuild mode. Us well we have two seasons of not getting to the big dance will we buck the trend with mature recruits in Hopper and Taranto. The last question is will the trend continue with Geelong.
I think it tells us once you hit 27 the window is mostly limited and regeneration is needed in a big way.
-
The AFL Prospectus used to do this list analysis. It needs to make a comeback.
-
Stats stats and damn lies when not done in context.
I wish they would stop being lazy and put up the age of the best 22"s of each team and say the number of say 21, 22 and unders at each club.
Could have this wrong i did it real quick but last year and of course it has changed but Hathorn had 18 aged 22 or under the premiers 14 and we were in the middle with 16. Sydney had 15 with another 5 aged 23. adelaide had 21 players aged 22 or under
Another look is Carlton had just 12 aged 22 and under but had another 18 aged 23 - 25. still all young and shows they have been developing their kids for awhile while the likes of say Hawthorn are basically starting out.
I reckon if you do the maths every club has a good share of young players but every club varys in how many games they have managed to put into them.
Most clubs best 22 is invariably older than the overall age of their lists because the developed players tend to get games in front of undeveloped kids.
The tipping point seems to be when your team not your list hits an average age of 27.
While premierships have been won with an average age of 27 it has been done just 5 times i believe since the draft began.
P/A in 2004, Geelong 2011, Hawthorn 2015, Richmond 2020, Geelong 2022.
Interesting thing is none of them had success for periods after winning a flag having hitting that age with their best 22.
P/A t has been 19 yrs since their flag and they went into heavy decline. Geelong have managed to stay in finals but it took 11 years to win another flag. Hawthorn continue to be in rebuild mode. Us well we have two seasons of not getting to the big dance will we buck the trend with mature recruits in Hopper and Taranto. The last question is will the trend continue with Geelong.
I think it tells us once you hit 27 the window is mostly limited and regeneration is needed in a big way.
Claw, from your perspective and philosophy of list management who would be in the window this season?
Brisbane? Carlton?
-
My perspective based on history says both Brisbane and Carlton are very much in a window for success. Based on team age, that is not list age but best 22 and average games played. So that equates to Reaching 24 plus years and 80 plus games on average. It also means both teams have the majority of players aged somewhere around 23 to 28 in their prime with enough 100 plus gamers to lead them
In coming to those figures i went back thru premiership teams to 1986 mainly.
I had to go back to the 70's to find a 23yo premiership team. Hawthorn did it twice 76 and 78 it has not been done since. they averaged 92 and 103 games per team.
It was fairly common prior to this. I think there are some obvious reasons why, the main one being players did not play as long as they do today.
For me looking at the past and starting sort of when the game became more professional, the age of the AFL in 86, with National drafts more money in the game. Going from players working for a living to semi professional, players then becoming full time hence staying in the game longer with greater emphasis on health fitness and medical improvements in operations etc.
From 86 onwards the begining of the national comp and ND it seems to me that looking at premiership teams somethings are a constant
1/ Teams need to be aged mostly between 24 and 26. No team has won aged 23 yrs and under as stated i had to go back prior to the national comp in 1978 to find one..
As i have mentioned just 5 teams have managed the feat once they hit an average age of 27. So far the trend has been once at 27 decline happens. Teams either have to rebuild or find a way to bring in top end younger talent.
An interesting one was Brisbane and port in 2004. They averaged p/a 27years,2 days with 129 games and Brisbane averaged 27 years, 181 days with 166 games and both went into heavy decline.
2/ Teams winning premierships need to get their team to at least 80 games on average. Only adelaide in 1997 have won a flag with less than 80 games with a team average of 73 games. A point of interest StKilda who they beat were younger at 24yrs 242 days and only averaged 87 games a player.
To me around about 80 games seems to be about the minimum for success.
3/ Having enough old heads that is players with a minimum 100 games. I Have not gone thru this at all but i would guess about 8 - 10 would be a minimum
4/ Getting enough players into the prime age bracket say 23 thru 28 with enough games. Obviously that means kids have been developed and have got a decent amount of games behind them. Premiership teams have few juniors in them usually.
5/ Last having enough quality players in key areas. That one is open to what you think quality is.
Basically all im doing is looking at the past and working out as best i can where i think you need to get to at a minimum to challenge.
History in some areas tells us obvious things.
Just to finish a few things to sort of back up what im saying. WCE in 1991 made their first grand final they lost to a battle hardened seriously experienced Hawthorn team nearing the end.
They were only 23 years, 347 days and had just 65 games on average. They would go on to win the next 2 out of three flags having got a little bit older and experienced..
A far worse outcome in 1988 for Melbourne. They were thrashed by Hawthorn at their peak with a team averaging you guessed it 23 years, 237 days with an average of 60 games. For them they could not build on that and while they played finals for the next 3 or 4 seasons they could not win a flag. Being young and talented does not always mean success will come.
Last one even the so called Baby Bombers managed to get to the age games threshold at 24 years, 105 days and 86 games on average.
They did not play in another grand final until 2000.
-
Just on us. Right atm and im probably a bit out the average age of our best 23 is on or about 27.3.
The team i selected has an average games played ratio of 133.9
Including Taranto with 98 games it had 14 players with 100 games.
It had 11 players in the 23 to 28 age bracket
It had just 3 juniors 21 or under.
It had 9 vets aged 29 or older.
It went like this and im sure it would be very close to most peoples best 23.
B/ Vlastuin - Tarrant - Grimes
HB/ Broad - Balta - D Rioli
C/ McIntosh - Taranto - Pickett
R/ Nankervis - Hopper - Prestia
HF/ Bolton - Riewoldt - Cumberland
F/ M Rioli - Lynch - Miller
Int/ Martin - Cotchin - Sonsie - Baker - Short.
Atm the only debate about that team would be fitting in the likes of Graham Ross and perhaps HRS and Gibcus when he gets fit.
-
The best sides always have players who compete for a game and players who can step up if there are injuries, we have most areas covered but it’s leads to why there is concern on key forwards
-
The best sides always have players who compete for a game and players who can step up if there are injuries, we have most areas covered but it’s leads to why there is concern on key forwards
Not having a go here but im not sure we can say we have most areas covered not when it comes to age and experience.
Out side of the best 23 we have just 4 players left who have more than 20 games to their names.
They would be
Graham 25 yrs 97gms.
Soldo 26yrs 9mths with 49 games.
Ross 22yrs 5mths with 44 games,
Castagna 26yrs 6mths with 134 games a bloke every thinks is lucky to be on the list and has been surpassed by at least three others.
Ross aside they are also the oldest players left.
One thing for sure when a whole pile of injuries hit we are going to have to rely on mostly juniors with very few games to their name.
Injuries not just to our talls but every where will impact us.
For what its worth the average age of the 19 reserves would be 21.7 and average just 20 games. Take the four mentioned out of the equation and it plummets. In going for a flag this is a big concern imo.